Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:236–244. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors’ aim was to assess the agreement betwe...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) Conn.), 2012-04, Vol.14 (4), p.236-244 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 244 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 236 |
| container_title | The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel De La Sierra, Alejandro Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M. Merino‐Barber, Luisa Faus, María J. |
| description | J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:236–244. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors’ aim was to assess the agreement between awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), home blood pressure (HBP), and CPBP in treated hypertensive patients. This was a cross‐sectional study carried out in 169 patients in which blood pressure (BP) was measured at the pharmacy (4 visits), at home (4 days), and by 24‐hour ABP monitoring. Lin correlation‐concordance coefficient (CCC) and Bland‐Altman plots were used to evaluate quantitative agreement. The qualitative agreement to establish the degree of BP control was evaluated using κ coefficient. The agreement was acceptable between HBP and CPBP (CCC=0.80 for systolic BP [SBP] and 0.80 for diastolic BP [DBP]; κ=0.62) and moderate between awake ABP and CPBP (CCC=0.74/0.67, respectively; κ=0.56). The Bland‐Altman plots also showed lowest mean differences (0.5/0.3 for SBP and DBP, respectively) for the comparison between CPBP and HBP. The CPBP has a better agreement with HBP than with awake ABP. Thus, the CPBP measurement method could be a good alternative to HBP monitoring, whereas it cannot be used as a screening test to assess the degree of BP control by awake ABP. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00598.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8108997</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1011189249</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4738-a9475d13ae30e78c41723f307c3896249e089c4b42d5491b8d6e72794cd78cf53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkd9u0zAUxiMEYmPwCsiX3DTYsVPbCCFlVUdBq6igXFuuc7KkSuLOdrblnXhInHVUcIdvzr_f-XykL0kQwSmJ7_0-JTwnM074PM0wyVKMcynSh2fJ-WnwPOZ5xmbz2DlLXnm_jxClEr9MzrKM5YKz_Dz5Vdw4gA76gC4h3AP0aGG7buibMKJNrV2nzYh0X6Ki2w2tDtYdy5XtAF221pZo48D7wQFag57io9oaQm1Lj4JFhfcRQKEGtKwqMKG5g37q2AoVfWjq8QAuQO9jH20d6DApfEDbuLBeboqr4jv6EYZyfJ28qHTr4c1TvEh-Xi23i9Xs-tvnL4viemYYp2KmJeN5SagGioELwwjPaEUxN1TIecYkYCEN27GszJkkO1HOgWdcMlNGusrpRfLpqHsYdh2UJl7jdKsOrum0G5XVjfp30je1urF3SpCoLHkUePck4OztAD6orvEG2lb3YAevCI4uChlPiag4osZZ7x1Up28IVpPZaq8mT9XkqZrMVo9mq4e4-vbvM0-Lf9yNwMcjcN-0MP63sPq6WMWE_gZDa7ur</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1011189249</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study</title><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel ; De La Sierra, Alejandro ; Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo ; Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M. ; Merino‐Barber, Luisa ; Faus, María J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel ; De La Sierra, Alejandro ; Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo ; Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M. ; Merino‐Barber, Luisa ; Faus, María J. ; MEPAFAR Study Workgroup ; on behalf of the MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</creatorcontrib><description>J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:236–244. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors’ aim was to assess the agreement between awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), home blood pressure (HBP), and CPBP in treated hypertensive patients. This was a cross‐sectional study carried out in 169 patients in which blood pressure (BP) was measured at the pharmacy (4 visits), at home (4 days), and by 24‐hour ABP monitoring. Lin correlation‐concordance coefficient (CCC) and Bland‐Altman plots were used to evaluate quantitative agreement. The qualitative agreement to establish the degree of BP control was evaluated using κ coefficient. The agreement was acceptable between HBP and CPBP (CCC=0.80 for systolic BP [SBP] and 0.80 for diastolic BP [DBP]; κ=0.62) and moderate between awake ABP and CPBP (CCC=0.74/0.67, respectively; κ=0.56). The Bland‐Altman plots also showed lowest mean differences (0.5/0.3 for SBP and DBP, respectively) for the comparison between CPBP and HBP. The CPBP has a better agreement with HBP than with awake ABP. Thus, the CPBP measurement method could be a good alternative to HBP monitoring, whereas it cannot be used as a screening test to assess the degree of BP control by awake ABP.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1524-6175</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1751-7176</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00598.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22458745</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use ; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation ; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods ; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - statistics & numerical data ; Confidence Intervals ; Female ; Home Care Services ; Humans ; Hypertension - diagnosis ; Hypertension - drug therapy ; Hypertension - pathology ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Original Paper ; Original Papers ; Pharmacies - statistics & numerical data ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Reproducibility of Results ; ROC Curve ; Statistics as Topic</subject><ispartof>The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2012-04, Vol.14 (4), p.236-244</ispartof><rights>2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4738-a9475d13ae30e78c41723f307c3896249e089c4b42d5491b8d6e72794cd78cf53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4738-a9475d13ae30e78c41723f307c3896249e089c4b42d5491b8d6e72794cd78cf53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8108997/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8108997/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,1411,1427,27901,27902,45550,45551,46384,46808,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22458745$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De La Sierra, Alejandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino‐Barber, Luisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faus, María J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</creatorcontrib><title>Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study</title><title>The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)</title><addtitle>J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)</addtitle><description>J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:236–244. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors’ aim was to assess the agreement between awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), home blood pressure (HBP), and CPBP in treated hypertensive patients. This was a cross‐sectional study carried out in 169 patients in which blood pressure (BP) was measured at the pharmacy (4 visits), at home (4 days), and by 24‐hour ABP monitoring. Lin correlation‐concordance coefficient (CCC) and Bland‐Altman plots were used to evaluate quantitative agreement. The qualitative agreement to establish the degree of BP control was evaluated using κ coefficient. The agreement was acceptable between HBP and CPBP (CCC=0.80 for systolic BP [SBP] and 0.80 for diastolic BP [DBP]; κ=0.62) and moderate between awake ABP and CPBP (CCC=0.74/0.67, respectively; κ=0.56). The Bland‐Altman plots also showed lowest mean differences (0.5/0.3 for SBP and DBP, respectively) for the comparison between CPBP and HBP. The CPBP has a better agreement with HBP than with awake ABP. Thus, the CPBP measurement method could be a good alternative to HBP monitoring, whereas it cannot be used as a screening test to assess the degree of BP control by awake ABP.</description><subject>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Confidence Intervals</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Home Care Services</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypertension - diagnosis</subject><subject>Hypertension - drug therapy</subject><subject>Hypertension - pathology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Original Papers</subject><subject>Pharmacies - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Predictive Value of Tests</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>ROC Curve</subject><subject>Statistics as Topic</subject><issn>1524-6175</issn><issn>1751-7176</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkd9u0zAUxiMEYmPwCsiX3DTYsVPbCCFlVUdBq6igXFuuc7KkSuLOdrblnXhInHVUcIdvzr_f-XykL0kQwSmJ7_0-JTwnM074PM0wyVKMcynSh2fJ-WnwPOZ5xmbz2DlLXnm_jxClEr9MzrKM5YKz_Dz5Vdw4gA76gC4h3AP0aGG7buibMKJNrV2nzYh0X6Ki2w2tDtYdy5XtAF221pZo48D7wQFag57io9oaQm1Lj4JFhfcRQKEGtKwqMKG5g37q2AoVfWjq8QAuQO9jH20d6DApfEDbuLBeboqr4jv6EYZyfJ28qHTr4c1TvEh-Xi23i9Xs-tvnL4viemYYp2KmJeN5SagGioELwwjPaEUxN1TIecYkYCEN27GszJkkO1HOgWdcMlNGusrpRfLpqHsYdh2UJl7jdKsOrum0G5XVjfp30je1urF3SpCoLHkUePck4OztAD6orvEG2lb3YAevCI4uChlPiag4osZZ7x1Up28IVpPZaq8mT9XkqZrMVo9mq4e4-vbvM0-Lf9yNwMcjcN-0MP63sPq6WMWE_gZDa7ur</recordid><startdate>201204</startdate><enddate>201204</enddate><creator>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel</creator><creator>De La Sierra, Alejandro</creator><creator>Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo</creator><creator>Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M.</creator><creator>Merino‐Barber, Luisa</creator><creator>Faus, María J.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201204</creationdate><title>Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study</title><author>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel ; De La Sierra, Alejandro ; Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo ; Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M. ; Merino‐Barber, Luisa ; Faus, María J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4738-a9475d13ae30e78c41723f307c3896249e089c4b42d5491b8d6e72794cd78cf53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Confidence Intervals</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Home Care Services</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypertension - diagnosis</topic><topic>Hypertension - drug therapy</topic><topic>Hypertension - pathology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Original Papers</topic><topic>Pharmacies - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Predictive Value of Tests</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>ROC Curve</topic><topic>Statistics as Topic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De La Sierra, Alejandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino‐Barber, Luisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Faus, María J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>on behalf of the MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sabater‐Hernández, Daniel</au><au>De La Sierra, Alejandro</au><au>Sánchez‐Villegas, Pablo</au><au>Santana‐Pérez, Fidelina M.</au><au>Merino‐Barber, Luisa</au><au>Faus, María J.</au><aucorp>MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</aucorp><aucorp>on behalf of the MEPAFAR Study Workgroup</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study</atitle><jtitle>The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)</jtitle><addtitle>J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)</addtitle><date>2012-04</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>236</spage><epage>244</epage><pages>236-244</pages><issn>1524-6175</issn><eissn>1751-7176</eissn><abstract>J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:236–244. ©2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors’ aim was to assess the agreement between awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), home blood pressure (HBP), and CPBP in treated hypertensive patients. This was a cross‐sectional study carried out in 169 patients in which blood pressure (BP) was measured at the pharmacy (4 visits), at home (4 days), and by 24‐hour ABP monitoring. Lin correlation‐concordance coefficient (CCC) and Bland‐Altman plots were used to evaluate quantitative agreement. The qualitative agreement to establish the degree of BP control was evaluated using κ coefficient. The agreement was acceptable between HBP and CPBP (CCC=0.80 for systolic BP [SBP] and 0.80 for diastolic BP [DBP]; κ=0.62) and moderate between awake ABP and CPBP (CCC=0.74/0.67, respectively; κ=0.56). The Bland‐Altman plots also showed lowest mean differences (0.5/0.3 for SBP and DBP, respectively) for the comparison between CPBP and HBP. The CPBP has a better agreement with HBP than with awake ABP. Thus, the CPBP measurement method could be a good alternative to HBP monitoring, whereas it cannot be used as a screening test to assess the degree of BP control by awake ABP.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>22458745</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00598.x</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1524-6175 |
| ispartof | The journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2012-04, Vol.14 (4), p.236-244 |
| issn | 1524-6175 1751-7176 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8108997 |
| source | Wiley Free Content; MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Antihypertensive Agents - therapeutic use Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - methods Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory - statistics & numerical data Confidence Intervals Female Home Care Services Humans Hypertension - diagnosis Hypertension - drug therapy Hypertension - pathology Male Middle Aged Original Paper Original Papers Pharmacies - statistics & numerical data Predictive Value of Tests Reproducibility of Results ROC Curve Statistics as Topic |
| title | Agreement Between Community Pharmacy and Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Measurement Methods to Assess the Effectiveness of Antihypertensive Treatment: The MEPAFAR Study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T21%3A38%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Agreement%20Between%20Community%20Pharmacy%20and%20Ambulatory%20and%20Home%20Blood%20Pressure%20Measurement%20Methods%20to%20Assess%20the%20Effectiveness%20of%20Antihypertensive%20Treatment:%20The%20MEPAFAR%20Study&rft.jtitle=The%20journal%20of%20clinical%20hypertension%20(Greenwich,%20Conn.)&rft.au=Sabater%E2%80%90Hern%C3%A1ndez,%20Daniel&rft.aucorp=MEPAFAR%20Study%20Workgroup&rft.date=2012-04&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=236&rft.epage=244&rft.pages=236-244&rft.issn=1524-6175&rft.eissn=1751-7176&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00598.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1011189249%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1011189249&rft_id=info:pmid/22458745&rfr_iscdi=true |